Re: r8616: candidate for 1.0.1: Improved warnings from svnlook and svnadmin

[kf...@collab.net]

Julian Foad <ju...@btopenworld.com> writes:
> Perhaps a "-1" vote is too strong in this case.  Apologies if so.  I
> was toying with the idea of casting "-0.5".  Or maybe "+1 (concept),
> with the following concerns...".  If it didn't already have three
> +1s I might have done so.

No, I think -1 is appropriate when you have real concerns.  It's not
like 1.0.1 is useless without this change (in the worst case that the
veto can't be resolved before then, with a new change or something).

-K

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org